Skip to main content

About your Search

English 31
Search Results 0 to 30 of about 31
for medicaid and medicare is of such services. >> the morning. i am susan dencer. happy new year and welcome to our briefing on the national health spending numbers. this is a ritual at the centers for medicare and medicaid services as well as for health affairs to bring out these spending numbers every year, and we are delighted to be able to do that once more. this year we have a historic set of numbers to help cms actuaries and other members unveiled. as you were here and perhaps already read, who have had a historic slowdown in the rate of health spending, the slowest rate of growth in 50 years. of course, the other side of the story is that health spending still grew faster than the overall economy, so we are not out of our long-term trajectory of health-care spending growth continuing to outpace the growth in the gross domestic product. with no further ado, i am going to turn it over to our five panelists to present the data further. you will be hearing from mika hartmann, a statistician in the health statistics group. he works primarily on historical and age-based national health esti
these are some of the hearings we had. medicare advantage which you'll hear about tonight. predatory sales practice. may 15, 2008, we did nursing home standards. we passed the nursing home standard law 25 years ago. never had a hearing on it. we had the first one. long-term care insurance, our consumers -- are consumers protected? june 16, termination of individual health insurance policies. you buy an individual family polcy, you fill out an application, right? we had two hearings on this. our investigation took us about 18 months into this. when you fill out your insurance policy, there's most insurance companies have about 1,400 different codes. you go to the local drugstore you fill out your prescription, you run it through the insurance company. if you trigger one of those 1,00 codes, they'll probably go through and review your policy because what this code triggered was it might be very expensive medical treatment you'll face in the future and therefore they are going to dump you off your insurance if they can and they do it under thing called rescission. for instance, one family, th
no alternative. medicare is cash negative today. the trustees tellus it will be insolvent in eight years. so security is cash-today, and in your report of the day before yesterday says it will be cashed negative every year except two for the future. you say in your report it will go cash negative and a permanent basis in 2016. anybody that says you did not have to make any changes to those programs, programs i strongly support, and i know i lost my parents when i was young. i got so security that helped me go to college. so i understand its importance in people's lives. i understand the importance of medicare in people's lives. i have seen in my own family. . . @ @ @ ,b number of people who are eligible for these programs, you're going to have to do something on the revenue side as well. so i again welcome you to the committee. and again, thank you for you and your team's extraordinary work your team's extraordinary work during t many months. >> thank you, mr. chairman and senator gregg for your very kind words about our work at cbo. exactly one year today i testified before this committee f
for taking my call. the so-called reduction in medicare that the republicans more or less talk about on a regular basis is really -- is it information or misinformation about the program, either the senate or the house of representatives bill, are they going to really reduce the amount of money into medicare to pay for this plan? and also the public option, why is it that they are not wanting to really fight for the public option? it seems to me that that would be a good way to go and if people are purchasing insurance, you know, they're responsible for reading the policy and knowing what coverage they have and, you know, it's just like taking out a loan. if you don't read the fine print and you sign on the dotted line, you're responsible. because it's a contract. andity think the republicans are just fear mongering and trying to kill the bill simply because of the input of the lobbyists from the insurance, you know, the big corporations. host: thanks for your call. guest: a comment on the medicare question briefly. the pieces in the health legislation that would reduce costs under m
that doctors treating medicare patients knew what they'd be getting years out so that medicare would have a stability that it needs. i yield back. mr. cantor: i thank the gentleman, madam speaker. and i would say again, somehow in the gentleman's memory of these past years there is something that's left out and that is the -- this body and congress. because during the clinton years, the clinton years that saw prosperity, there was a republican control of congress. and they yielded tax policies that we believe could once again get us back on track. in the same way all the job losses that the gentleman continues to recite and point fingers and blame on the prior administration, if we're going to play that game, i would say that since his party has taken control of this body we've lost in this country 6.1 million jobs. as he says, none of the job losses are acceptable. there are many ways to look at these figures and who was responsible for what and could claim credit for such. but at the end of the day what we're facing right now is a situation where the american people and the small busine
, medicare and otherwise, being asked to pay for that additional -- setting aside something that unionized workers will not have to face for an additional five years? >> i think some of the revenue questions are obviously part of the discussions that are ongoing. the president has made a commitment that he will keep to ensure that this legislation is fully paid for. again, it is something that is a little different that is going on in washington these days. this is a proposal that will be scored and it will be rendered a judgment as to the fact that the president will pay for every ççdime in this bill. the compensated for in taxes for additional medicare savings? >> again, i think some of the discussions are ongoing. >> on healthcare, the last month or six weeks you all have proceeded with no republican support, no republican negotiations as far as anyone can tell, 60-40 votes. and it looked like you were on the glide path to passing it in the senate's with democratic- only boats. you now faced the prospect in çmassachusettsç of possibly needing a republican vote. is there some reg
- term liabilities is medicare, medicaid, and health care spending. nothing comes close. social security would probably fix the same way to and ronald reagan sat down together and could figure something out. that is manageable. medicare and medicaid are a massive problem down the road. that is going to be what our children have to worry about. paul's approach, i want to be careful to not simplify this because i know you have a lot of detail in your plan, but i understand it to say that we will provide doctors of some sort for current medicare recipients at the current level. 55 and over. there is a grandfathering in for future beneficiaries. i just want to point out that i have read it. the basic idea is that at some point, we hold medicare costs per recipient constant as a way of making sure that it does not go way out of black. i am sure there are some details -- we hold medicare costs per recipient constant as a way of making sure that it does not have things going out of wahack. it has to be reformed for the younger generations because it is going bankrupt. why not give people the sa
to resolve their differences between the house and the senate version of the medicare reform legislation that provided prescription drug benefits for medicare recipients. a very important piece of legislation, one that was not without some controversy, the house passed a version, the senate passed a version, and then in the light of day these two versions were negotiated on these days, the american people got to see the discussions that went on and got to see this bill being crafted that eventually became law. if the democrats weren't engaging in these backroom deal making deals, i don't think they'd mind the lights being turned on but the problem is they're cutting deals and the reason they're having to cut deals is because they're trying to pats a -- pass a piece of legislation that the american people don't embrace. many of us agree that health care needs to be reformed. and my colleagues on my side of the aisle, republicans and conservatives, have been offering some commonsense ideas that could reform the current system without turning over the health care to the government, without
. they control my blood pressure and everything. it is not cost me a dime. i could be on medicare, but i chose not to do it. i've been with the va since i got out of the service in 1971. but why are all of these tests being run? and i know it costs money. host: thank you. in fact, testing has been a regular theme of your story here is 1 "new yorker" article with the headline, "testing, testing." guest: your caller hit the button on one of the issues driving the process, the malpractice system, which is driven in ways -- let me give you an example -- headaches. one community tried to look at how many ct scans and cedar rapids, iowa, they were doing for people. they did 50,000 cds dance for a population of 300,000 people a year. all of us know this is not necessary. 10,000 of them were for had ct scans, and only a tiny number of some of it was fear of malpractice suits. more significant part of it is that we have not really established what our process is, our appropriate guideline for care for handling the headaches so we can do it the right way, so we have tens of thousands of unnecessary ct s
've dealt with medicare patients for my entire practice, when you take $500 billion out of a plan that's already underfunded and goes upside down in premiums in about 2017 and beginning next year, the baby boomers hit, three million to three and a half million every year, you take half a trillion dollars out and add 30 million to 35 million people, three things happen. you have decreased access, two, you're not going to be able to get in to see the doctor, two, you have decreased quality and three, seniors get this their costs are going to get up to get the needed care they need. mr. akin: doctor, you are so eloquent and said it so smoothly, i think you we need to underline what you said. what you're saying is we're going to take $500 billion out of medicare. is this a republican that's going to raid medicare? mr. roe: no, sir. mr. akin: we've been accused of raiding medicare. but it's not us. mr. roe: no, sir, unless you're in florida, of course. mr. akin: if you take $500 billion out of medicare, it's going to be harder to provide services for people. you're not doing just that, you'
the center for medicare education, the better jobs better care of national program. she was a political appointee during the clinton administration, serving in the department of health and human services. she also was assistant secretary for aging in 1997. she is been a senior researcher for health services research and project hope center for health affairs previously. to begin, but welcome to the podium. let's welcome him to the podium. >> people tend to view long-term care through a particular lands, depending on what they are interested in. some people focus on specific federal programs. they might focus on quality issues or workforce issues. they also tend to focus on specific populations of elderly. as carol levine said in her article, the whole is often eclipsed by a separate part. this article is an attempt to paint a picture of that hole, although i realize there are plenty of my own biases in it. we include people receiving long-term care from public programs, from family members, from private paid workers, whether they live in the community or institutions, whether they are e
movement, social security, medicare, the minimum wage, the 40-hour week, the civil-rights act, the voting rights act -- that is what made the united states a beacon of hope in a confused and divided world. but to many people now take for granted government rolls as protector of wall street and the privilege. they see middle-class americans as overpaid and underworked. as the social security as a problem -- they see social security as a problem rather than the only piece of our retirement system that actually work. they feel sorry for homeless people but fail to see the connection between downsizing and outsourcing in inequality and homelessness. the republicans offered the middle class the false hope of tax cuts. the end up in reaching the rich, devastating the middle-class by destroying institutions like public education and social security that make the middle class possible. are you try to tell me something? >> yes, we are now in your question and answer period. [laughter] >> we're going to start with a question and answer period. >> i can wrap up and a couple of minutes but not 30 sec
. with that let me commend our medicare person once again. i -- commend our chairperson once again. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. lee: thank you, madam speaker. let me thank all of the members today for coming down to the floor in support of this resolution. but more importantly in support of the people of haiti. i end by calling on awful my colleagues to join me in -- i end by calling on all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution, our sustained commitment to the people of haiti in the wake of this ongoing tragedy. as we move forward, let us not waiver in saying to the people of haiti, your resilience, your dignity, your courage, even during your darkest hours continues to inspire us. and during your darkest hours, the united states and the american people will not abandon you as you continue to struggle for a fwriter tomorrow. i urge -- for a brighter tomorrow. i urge my colleagues to support the resolution and i yield the balance of my time. th
, the spending part of this has been combined with a promise to increase taxes and to reduce medicare outlays so that the sandwich that is produced, spending increases and revenue sources, as far as the cbo's rules are concerned that they have to cost out to develop a whole. they tell you what the individual components are, but the headline that comes out is that the legislation as a whole will not add a dime to the national debt indeed will reduce the national debt. but i wonder if anybody really believes that medicare outlays are going to be reduced by $500 billion over the next several years. after all, while getting ready to enact that provision, congress and of course that doesn't start for a few years, congress passed grade now been repealing previous legislation, which would have cut medicare payments to physicians by more than $200 billion. finally there's the issue of increasing health care costs. i think the obama administration and peter or his bag in particular have correctly identified increase in health care costs as a major problem for families, for businesses and for the fiscal v
to that is more government. 60% of all health care is run by the government today. medicare, medicaid, the indian health service, military and the v.a.. 60% of it is run by the government. one of the reasons you have an absolute shortage of primary- care doctors in this country is because we have set the price for what they are going to pay for primary care and the doctors will not go into it anymore. there's aÑi 350% payment differential. we can either say we react -- say we have relied on market scarce resources or we can deny it and allow the government to run it. i think the old -- the health care bill will ultimately pass. Ñiyou saw what happened in the senate. and they will do the same thing in the house to get the votes that they need. we will have a health care bill that the president will sign. i do not think it is the best answer for us as a nation. i can tell you what is inÑi that bill. it puts the government in charge of what you will get, when you will get it, and where you will get, and that is even if you have private insurance. they will deny that, but i can show you the differ
, for example, put in place medicare and medicaid, but i think it's more like, to my mind, covering the seniors, you know, seniors are no longer the poorest americans, young people are now, kids, but there was a day in american hive when seniors, especially older women really were in needs of protection, a social safety net. we saw some of that with social security and don't forget it covers widows, orphans and that kind of thing and then with medicare, again, to pick up the idea that the elderly should not be struggling for healthcare coverage, and now, i think the extension would be to make sure that all americans have some basic levels of healthcare coverage and that people don't have to scrap for, you know -- don't have to worry about having some catastrophic illness that will bankrupt them. it is not only them. we think of it in terms of individuals, but i can't tell you how often when i'm not doing or or thing, i come across people who are small business owners who complain about the high cost of healthcare benefits for employees and of course, we have seen what happened with the auto com
is the good news -- compared to medicare, social security is in reasonably good shape, with a relatively small adjustments, you can have a solvent for a long time to the social security is going to be there. i know people are concerned about it. social security we can fix. in terms of the cola, which stands for cost-of-living allowance -- it is put in place to make sure that social security is keeping up with inflation. here is the problem -- this past year, because of the severity of the recession, we did on that inflation, we had deflation. -- we did not have inflation, we had deflationary prices actually fell last year. as a consequence, seniors were not eligible for a cost-of- living adjustment because prices did not go up in the aggregate. that does not mean that individual folks were not being pinched by higher heating prices or what have you, but on average, prices went down. here is what we did -- working with these key members of congress here, we did vote to provide aid to order to the dollar -- provide the $250 one- time payment to seniors, which when he factored in, amounted to 1.8
marketplace. we want a system where seniors don't have huge gaps in their medicare prescription drug coverage. and where medicare itself is on a sound financial footing. those are the things that we're fighting for. and i'm not going to stop on that, because it's the right thing to do. and by the way, if you are serious about reducing our deficit and debt, you cannot accomplish it without reforming our health care system, because that's what's gobbling up more federal dollars than anything else. i don't understand folks who say they don't want to see government spending out of control and then are fighting reforms that the congressional budget office says would cut $1 trillion off our deficit over the next two decades. those aren't my numbers. we're never going to stop fighting to cut waste and abuse. we have had deficits that have been accumulating for too long. families across the country are tightening their belt and making tough decisions. it's time for the federal government to do the same. and that's why i proposed specific steps last night to bring the deficit down. and i'm grateful th
't let the government put its hands on my medicare tax code -- medicare?" >> we are hoping to point out that that crisis is sufficiently imminent so that we have to move ahead, and we think that is likely to be persuasive. it is not that the leadership of the congress and the administration do not know about this problem. it is not that they do not know what some of the options are. but so far partisanship has prevailed, and we hope we can turn that around. >> i think it is obvious that the leadership in both houses know the problems are big and know it is bad. if we can just add to the trepidation, to the fear that this is something really big, and we'd better think big an act big and try to pull ourselves together so that we can politically we're doing something we would not otherwise do, we cannot do that if we're not addressing the problem in that way. one more. >> "new york times", senator dementia. one of the biggest things -- senator demomenciici. could you explain why you think that taxes have to be on the table? senator mitch mcconnell said the he would accept a cut spending co
as proposed by the house democrats will save lives, will save money, will save jobs, and will save medicare. it is time to pass health care reform. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? >> request permission to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. wolf: i rise today to voice my strong support of google's intention to consider pulling out of china due to a highly sophisticated and targeted attack on its corporate infrastructure and email service. google is making a principle stand reminiscent of the companies that pulled out of apartheid south africa and fascist germany. "the washington post" today reported that google said it is eminent that a primary call on the attackers accessing the g-mail accounts of chinese human rights activists. they found the accounts of literally brave human rights advocates appear to have been routinely accessed by third parties. this is unconscionable but not surprising given china's long history of cracking down o
that cut medicare by half a trillion dollars in raises -- down the throats of the american people. >> another official in washington is michael steele it has caused some consternation among aides on capitol hill, i wonder, are you concerned about his "of late -- quotes of late? >> it be measured in two ways. how much money did you raise? how many elections did you win? that standard will be applied to this chairman as it has to others. >> you do not have any concern about -- >> chairman still will be bait -- judged on the basis of how much money did you raise? how many elections did you win? >> what is your sense following your visit to afghanistan about economic development? what can be done to promote specific legislation? >> afghanistan used to be an agricultural exporter. we visited the area near the two rivers. when you think of afghanistan, and you think of these mountain ranges. down south, the areas along the rivers, it is very fertile. to the extent that they can get on top of the pop the problem and it agriculture growing again, afghanistan has a chance to feed itself an
rights movement, social security, medicare, the minimum wage, the 40 hour week, the civil rights act, and the voting rights act. that is what made the united states a beacon of hope in a confused and divided world. but too many people now take for granted government's role as protector of wall street and privileged -- and the privileged. the see middle-class americans as overpaid and underworked. they see social security as a problem rather than the only piece of our retirement system that actually works. they feel sorry for homeless people, but fail to see the connections between downsizing and outsourcing and inequality and homelessness. this world view has brought democrats nothing but disaster. the republicans' response is to offer the middle-class the false hope of tax cuts. tax cuts and enriching the rich, devastating the middle-class by destroying the institutions like public education and social security that make the middle- class possible. are you trying to tell me something? >> we're now into the question and answer time. but i'm not done with what i have to say. i'm going
. social security, food stamps, medicare are examples of the more federal, uniform policies. if a program or policy is being developed at a time when there is a major goal to reduce the role of the federal government or the size of the federal government, which was true in the 1980's, the goal is to devolve decision making from the federal level down to lower levels. then you end up getting policies like the current welfare system, temporary assistance for needy families, and work-force development. if, on the other hand, a program is developed at the national level at a time when there is distrust of state and local governments, but more trust of the federal government, perhaps like in the '60s, during the war on poverty, then you may see more federal control of programs, but devolution down to the local level -- community action agencies, like public centers. depending on when a public -- when a policy or program is enacted, the philosophies, the values better, at that particular time heavily influenced the structure of the programs. nevertheless, the things that affect people the most
of financial fraud cases from mortgage fraud to medicare, and health care fraud to securities fraud, to corporate malfeasance. i'm proud that we have put in place a law enforcement response to the financial crisis, that is and will continue to be aggressive, comprehensive, and well coordinated. while the reach of our investigative and prosecutorial function is broad, we do not purport to have all the answers. as a general matter, we do not have the expertise, nor is it part of our mission to opine on the systemic causes of the financial crisis. rather, the justice department's resources are focused on investigating, and prosecuting crime. it is within this context that i am pleased to offer my testimony and contribute to your vital review. the department has a long history of prosecuting financial fraud, an we will continue to do so. working in concert with our federal, state, local, tribal and territorial partners, the justice department is using every tool at our disposal, including new resources, advanced technologies, and communications capabilities, and the very best talent tha
, as you know, are mandatory programs, social security, medicare, veterans' programs, that's by far the lion's share of the federal budget. the next biggest share is defense. that's not part of what the president is discussing. he's talking about a share of the budget that is about 1/6 or 1/7 of the overall budget, that is domestic discretionary spending and he is proposing a freeze in those categories system of it's certainly not going to solve the problem. it will make a modest contribution toward reducing long-term deficit and debt thork it will make a contribution that grows over time which is very important. much more has to be done as the white house has acknowledged. >> [inaudible] >> look, there's no question in my mind that additional steps need to be taken to help build the environment in which jobs can be created. i asked the congressional budget office what are the most effective things that could be done for job creation? they came back and said, in terms of federal policy, the most important things that could be done is a tax credit for creating new jobs, they said sma
other district in the country, they want to cut medicare $500 billion. i've seen the cuts. they're very real. they want to raise taxes on small business. i know the biggest issue we got is the economy and jobs. working families want to get back to work, but yet they want to charge 8% on payroll. i've been in business for 30 years. i'm not a career politician. i can tell you that will kill more jobs than anything. that's a fixed expense. 8% on payroll. they want to charge another 5.4% tax on businesses, and most businesses have pass-through income. whether they are l.l.c., partnership or whatever kind of business, they want to raise the tax fathers 34, let bush's tax cut sunset, and another 5.4, take it 49% in florida. in many states like california that have a state income tax or oregon or new york of 10% or 15%, it could take it up as high as 60%. so these small businesses have a lot of pass-through income. they're not going to have the capital. they are going to be sending the money here. that's going to cut more jobs. it's time to bring sunshine to washington that we got in florida,
countries to provide necessary funding to avoid shortfalls in the medicare program for low-income qualifying individuals and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule the gentleman from washington, mr. mcdermott, and the gentlewoman from florida, ms. brown-waite, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognized the gentleman from washington. mr. mcdermott: i ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pallone, be allowed to control 10 minutes of the time for debate on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. mcdermott: i ask that all members have five elect slative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on s. 2949. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcdermott: madam speaker, two weeks ago, the largest earthquake in haiti wreaked havoc throughout the country. some of those affected are u.s. citizens now being evacuated back to the united states. we need tookt today to continue a program that helps the americans get back home. the repatriateuation act provides assistance to u
in charge more or less. and nothing was done about health care except for the part d medicare which me snuck through in the middle of the night. i watched it all night. i am a democrat but i listen to fox. i listen to glenn beck, hasity, o'riley, chris matthews, keith observerman. i christen to it all -- keith olbermann. i listened to it all. i didn't graduate high school. i went back and got a job and they sent me back to school. the constitution says -- i hear you saying about the constitution says this and says that. the constitution never said that you had to have firemen to take care of anybody's house to take care of a fire. the constitution never said you have to have insurance on cars. if you have a car you have to have it insured. host: james, what would you like michael steele to address? caller: why did they lose the race in maryland if they were such a great listener? guest: well, governorer lick and i did -- governor erlich and i did the unthinkable. the last republican governor before governor was speer agnew. and the people of maryland decided they wanted to take a diffe
, when on the first day he came in he could have gotten that medicare bill repealed. the fundamental state of our union needs to be flawed when no one will take responsibility for the state of our union, but just told the ideological or business ties as the motivation for their lives, as opposed to the founding fathers. guest: thank you for that comment. esolution expressing support for designation of january as poverty in america awareness month. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to the resolution. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the host: rep chris van hollen, what do you want to hear from the president? guest: and little recap of where we have been the last year. the president will point out a year ago the economy was in th
the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen medicare for seniors and stop insurance company abuses, let me know. that's when i put my hand up because that's exactly what the republican health care proposal does. much more so than the proposal that he and democrat leaders are trying to shove down the throats of the american people. and so we're eager for the president to come to our retreat tomorrow. we're going to have an honest conversation about america's priorities and trying to find ways to find some common ground. the republicans have stood all year against their job-killing agenda. republicans also all year have offered what i've called better solutions. we're going to continue to get on the same path this year. we're going to look for common ground but we're not going to roll over on our principles, we're not going to vote for things that we believe will hurt our country. at the same time, though, you're going to see us continue to work for better solutions for the american people. as we go off to our retreat today, republicans are going to work to develop better solutions when it c
the books. that was costing in terms of payroll taxes, social security, medicare, and things like that. that was causing new york city millions of dollars per year. it is a costly process. it is not necessarily because the people are there. host: mark krikorian? guest: legal status is not the problem. it is a small part of the problem. the problem is the supply shop with so many low-skilled workers pouring into the economy all at once. when they look at the immigration for the entire economy, they find a small economic benefit. where that small economic benefit comes from is distributing that benefit to the rest of society, to the chattering class'. is the right to cut the wages of low-skilled americans in order to reduce the price of tomatoes by 3 cents? my response is no, it's morally unjustifiable for us to do that to our fellow americans. guest: and consequently the growers in agriculture have been together to create ag jobs, which is a process that would insure a legal work force. guest: a cheap, controllable work force. host: dallas, dan, republican line. caller: good morning. i
Search Results 0 to 30 of about 31